Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Antwerp July 2015-3BW.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Antwerp July 2015-3BW.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2019 at 16:47:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors
Info A retro photo interpretation of a typical street in old Antwerp. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:47, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:47, 15 December 2019 (UTC)- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:29, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Comment Nice! But can you also perhaps produce a slightly different crop with more room at the top? So that the building in the middle and the street lamp are not cut off? --Domob (talk) 05:59, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
weak oppose I'm a strong advocate for more B&W photographs at FPC, but in this case I feel that neither is B&W a good choice for this subject nor is this subject a good choice for a strong B&W photograph. B&W emphasizes form and texture, but neither of these aspects are very strong in this scene to begin with. Or maybe it's just a matter of how the conversion was done: The color version has some contrasting colors (red bricks vs. green-ish road). By adjusting the color channels accordingly during conversion, maybe that could be utilized to separate the road more from the houses. That's one of the big advantages of digital B&W photography: You don't have to choose your emulsion and color filters in advance to get the desired effect. --El Grafo (talk) 09:08, 16 December 2019 (UTC)- Comment Thank you El Grafo, for taking the time suggesting how this photo could be improved. Maybe I could have enhanced the contrast between the various elements, e.g. between the ground and the building, by adjusting the relative contribution of each colour channel. The few experiments I did convinced me that the overall effects would be minimal unless "brute force" were used. That is precisely what I don't want to do because such approach would have ruined what I like more in this interpretation: the mood and the delicate local contrasts and structure. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:54, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Alvesgaspar: fair enough! That's another thing I enjoy about B&W, regardless of whether we're talking about digital or old school analog darkroom printing: when it comes to forming the final image it leaves a lot of room for interpretation. And speaking of printing, I've got a feeling that this interpretation might work very well as a large (A1+) print (although the soft foreground may turn out to be a bit of a problem then). And apologies for not mentioning this last time: I really like the scene and composition – I'm just not blown away by it. Changing my vote to a "weak oppose" to better reflect how I feel about this. --El Grafo (talk) 09:44, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per El Grafo. Daniel Case (talk) 02:42, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
- Support Fine composition. --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:41, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - Good documentation, but the composition isn't doing anything for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:50, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Weak support I actually like the composition a great deal, it's the image quality I'm not sure about - it looks somewhat oversharpened to me. Cmao20 (talk) 15:21, 19 December 2019 (UTC)- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:09, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:08, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
